Sections

Maher: Ruthless, zero-sum world of politics makes harassment allegations even harder to handle

The federal Liberals have kicked two MPs out of their caucus over accusations of personal misconduct made by two members from another party. A source familiar with the matter have identified the two as Quebec MP Massimo Pacetti and Scott Andrews, the member for Avalon in Newfoundland and Labrador and the party's ethics critic. Photo: Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press

Stephen Maher

Published: November 7, 2014 - 5:58 PM

Updated: November 7, 2014 - 8:11 PM

Sometime in 2013, after work one evening, a Liberal MP allegedly did something in a private location off Parliament Hill that a female NDP MP believed was wrong.

She felt unsafe in her workplace, and spoke to others about it, including her friend Scott Simms, a Liberal MP, but insisted that none of the people she spoke with should initiate a complaint.

NDP Leader Tom Mulcair found out, perhaps because she was struggling to cope with it and needed support from the party. She did not tell Mulcair the name of the Liberal MP, and asked him not to report it.

Sometime this year, after work one evening, another male Liberal MP allegedly did something in a private location off Parliament Hill that another female NDP MP believed was wrong.

Last week, in the bus on the way to the airport after the funeral of Cpl. Nathan Cirillo, the second NDP MP spoke to Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau about the first woman’s experience.

She may have made the comment to Trudeau impulsively on a difficult day, under the emotional strain of marking a tragic death after an armed attack on her workplace.

Once she brought an allegation of wrongdoing to Trudeau, he asked Liberal whip Judy Foote to investigate and figure out how the party should react.

There was no clear way to deal with this. Well-meaning people on both sides struggled toward a good solution and failed to find one.

Foote met with NDP whip Nycole Turmel and they sat down at the end of the week, in two separate meetings, with the complainants.

NDP whip Nycole Turmel.(Wayne Leidenfrost/ PNG)

The first woman only attended the meeting reluctantly. She had taken steps to recover from a painful event and didn’t want to reopen it. She was persuaded to explain what had happened to her, and, the NDP says, expressed the desire that it not be made public.

On Wednesday morning, as the parties started their regular weekly caucus meetings, she learned from a report on social media that the Liberals were to take action against two MPs.

Trudeau acted at lunchtime, suspending MPs Scott Andrews and Massimo Pacetti for allegations of “serious personal misconduct.” They both say they are innocent and will clear their names.

Sources who know the female MPs tell me the public announcement was very stressful for them.

Their reaction to the way the Liberals handled this explains the hot anger New Democrats expressed at Liberals this week.

A number of commentators have chided the party, and Mulcair, suggesting they are trying to score political points by complaining.

I don’t think that’s fair, because the first complainant is angry and hurt at how the Liberals proceeded, and Mulcair is speaking for her.

But I am not sure Mulcair’s criticism of the Liberals is correct, because they would be criticized however they acted. But what he is saying is not plainly wrong.

The two-party process of trying to sort this out began well enough.

It is difficult to imagine two better politicians to handle such a thing than Foote and Turmel.

Liberal whip Judy Foote.

Foote, 63, the MP for Random-Burin-St. George’s, is a former Newfoundland cabinet minister. She has been in politics for almost 20 years, and is just the kind of experienced, mature person you want to cope with this kind of thing.

Turmel, 72, is the MP for Hull-Aylmer, across the river from Ottawa. The former president of the Public Service Alliance of Canada, she was selected by Jack Layton to lead the party as interim leader when he was struck ill. Like Foote, she is a mature and experienced politician.

But the two women did not have a roadmap to follow. There is a process for staff who believe they have been harassed, but it was not clear how one politician who believes she has been harassed by another should proceed.

A New Democrat involved in trying to sort it out said it began as a “co-operative, collegial, adult interaction” that ended up as a “mess.”

A Liberal says that once an NDP MP told Trudeau, everyone was stuck in an “inescapable boat we have all been put in.”

Announcing the suspension without consulting the NDP MPs was in the best interests of the self-preservation of the Liberal leader, the New Democrat says, but not the best interests of the women affected.

The Liberals say they had no choice. They were afraid that the NDP would use this against them.

“It strikes me as the worst of politics that they would have that mindset,” says the New Democrat.

But many people in politics have that mindset. You must assume that your opponents will do whatever they can to defeat you.

People who are not immersed in the day-to-day struggle of partisan politics don’t understand how inherently remorseless it is.

Consider that if Trudeau is a successful leader, the two women in question will be unemployed because they will be replaced by Liberal MPs in the next election.

It is a ruthless, zero-sum game in which harassment allegations must be weighed for their political impact.

Given that, and the profound difficulty of the situation, observers are wisest to avoid drawing harsh conclusions about the conduct of either political party.

MPs need to set up a process for harassment allegations that is not influenced by partisan actors, so that everybody, including the two Liberal MPs, gets a fair hearing.

And all the parties need to make sure the Hill is a safe environment so that everybody can focus on their jobs.